If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#331
|
|||
|
|||
George Patterson wrote:
Morgans wrote: I wonder how many others feel the same way. Not I. My tablesaw and a few of my other tools were made in China. I read one review that stated they found the table surface on the Chinese brand of saw to be flatter than any other brand (including Delta). When the Chinese feel it's important to do so, they produce an excellent quality product. Where are Delta table saws made these days? I know that all of the small drill presses are now made off-shore and it wouldn't surprise me if this is true of table saws as well. Matt |
#332
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message ... George Patterson wrote: Morgans wrote: I wonder how many others feel the same way. Not I. My tablesaw and a few of my other tools were made in China. I read one review that stated they found the table surface on the Chinese brand of saw to be flatter than any other brand (including Delta). When the Chinese feel it's important to do so, they produce an excellent quality product. Where are Delta table saws made these days? I know that all of the small drill presses are now made off-shore and it wouldn't surprise me if this is true of table saws as well. Matt Bottom end Delta stuff is made in China. |
#333
|
|||
|
|||
"Newps" wrote Ahem...120,000 is not now and never will be a "metro area". Think again. In Iowa, and other Midwest and plains states, that is a downright huge metro area. Such as are the wide open spaces in the US. -- Jim in NC |
#334
|
|||
|
|||
"Dylan Smith" wrote I also observed when I was living in the US, soccer tended to be a girl's game - It is slowly changing. One problem, at least in NC, is that the boy's soccer season is at the same time as football. The most athletic boys go for the glamour of football (the one with the funny shaped ball that doesn't bounce right), and the smaller, speedy types go for soccer. -- Jim in NC |
#335
|
|||
|
|||
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message ... In article , Morgans wrote: Good Lord help us all! I suppose they will be made with China steel. That is the softest, inconsistent crap have ever seen, let alone all the other made in China crap. Unlikely - Diamond's planes are made of plastic! I know you are kidding, but I am sure there are some VERY important steel parts in the "plastic" airplane, too. ;-) -- Jim in NC |
#336
|
|||
|
|||
"Newps" wrote in message ... Martin Hotze wrote: the good thing is that I drive a car needing about 6 liters per 100 kilometers (the other car is a diesel needing about 4 to 5 liters per 100 kilometers). So I do care driving a fuelefficient car, because it saves me money. Somebody run the numbers. What is that in miles per gallon? Just wanted to compare that to my F250 Diesel. About 40MPG and 50MPG for the diesel. Such a car would likely be "useful" out in the west where distances are measured in three or even four digits and those are MILES not klicks. But Martin is such a good little milch cow!! He'll do as ordered! |
#337
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote in message hlink.net... "Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:97A9e.4563$c24.215@attbi_s72... Chris, it will only feel like we're subsidizing your flying, after the way you've been abused. Our airports are 100% supported by the (relatively small) taxes on our fuel. (Or, rather, they WOULD be, if our legislatures didn't continually rape the fund for all sorts of things that have nothing to do with aviation.) -- Jay Honeck Jay, this is total BS. The amount raised from the tax on avgas is $60 million annually. It doesn't even begin to pay for flight service stations nevermind airports or anything else. Even AOPA achknowleged this in a recent magazine. If we were to support airports with a gas tax gas would be $7.80...or more... Does the tax on Jet-A and other fees support the airlines usages? The passenger and fuel taxes are all mixed together. I used avgas tax and FSS because almost all the FSS users are flying piston engine airplanes. There really aren't any other fees that don't go to the airport owner. Has anyone ever done a complete breakout of costs vs. revenue of the air transport system at all levels? If you consider that most of the system exists for the airlines, with GA as an incremental user then the airlines are getting a pretty good deal. If you divide the cost among all users by the number of flights then GA is getting a good deal. People try to parse the facts to support their position. Another way to look at it is that GA pilots and companies with business aircraft pay income taxes and most airlines do not. The airlines would counter that they pay wages and their employees pay taxes. It goes on forever. One thing is clear though; piston GA is not paying its way through fuel taxes as many believe. If the airplane burns 10GPH and flys 100hrs/yr the fuel tax is only about $200/yr which doesn't cover much of anything. Interestingly, I recall a few articles a few years ago the over-the-road trucks pay roughly half of taxes and fees for the interstate and state highways, but they cause more than 3/4ths of wear-and-tear and damage. I recall a statistic that one max weight semi truck caused as much damage as 2300cars over the same road. This implies that trucking is indeed subsidized. The railroads have to maintain their own tracks. The system doesn't change because there are more truckers than railroads. When someone else foots the bill, new and more efficient processes and technologies never seem to get implemented as quickly as when we pay our own way (like good, mature adults). Yes I would support an IFR system like in the UK. You fly without radar separation below certain altitudes and you don't have to talk to ATC. AFAIK there has never been a collision. -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO |
#338
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:8C5ae.8520$r53.7576@attbi_s21... - The FAA, from the Federal Airport Improvement Program, will pay 90% of the costs for airport improvement (runway widening or extension or resurfacing, taxiways, aprons, and so forth). That's because the Feds have decided that maintaining an aviation infrastructure is in the interest of the country, and they understand that a local government entity is too small to pay the entire bill. Thus, they spread the cost over many users, rather than over just the few in (for example) Iowa City, Iowa. Now I suppose that premise is open to debate, too -- but that's the concept at the heart of the Federal subsidy. In that regard, runways are no different than freeways. We all pay for them -- and we all get to use them, if we choose. -- Jay Honeck No, there is a fundemental difference. The road tax on gasoline pays for all the roads and the taxes on aviation do not come close to paying for airports. Most of the 90% is coming from non-aviation sources. Aviation is heavily subsidized but so is everybody with an AGI under something between $100K and $200K/yr which is most taxpayers. Same thing with SS, recipients are getting way more in benefits than they paid in. Ask your local FBO's how much fuel they sell and what the taxes are and compare it to the airport budget then estimate the number of flights, figure $10 per weather briefing and see how the numbers come out. Mike MU-2 |
#339
|
|||
|
|||
"Martin Hotze" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote: It isn't important whether anybody likes it or not, what is important is realize that it is inevitable and change what and how we do things so we do not compete where we are at a major disadvantage. So what is your (US) or our (Europe) advantage? High costs for labor and energy, higher transportation costs, more restrictions and laws, lack of people willing to work really hard, etc. etc ... #m -- http://www.hotze.priv.at/album/aviation/caution.jpg Lots of intellectual property, extensive infrastructure, stable political system, lots of capital and educated people. Every country has about the same energy costs. The US and Europe are well positioned to compete in many industries. Part of what looks like a trade disaster with China is an error in the way we look at it. We may import a billion dollars worth of low margin rebar that China made a 5% profit on but we may provide them with $100 million worth of investment banking services that have a profit margin of 80%. It looks like a balance of payments disaster but the trade actually worked to our advantage. Yes, it looks like they got more dollars but they had to use them to produce the rebar. There will be a major change in economic theory soon because the current theories can't explain why high cost regions can produce (and sell) anything at all. The new theory will look at trade profitability instead of trade revenue. Mike MU-2 |
#340
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... "Mike Rapoport" wrote in message news Given that only a small percentage of Chineese are participating in their "new" economy, it will be a long time before this happens. Remember that Japan's economy stalled after they became (and remain) the richest developed nation on a per capita basis. Even after their economy puked, what, 2/3rds of it's value? -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO How are you arriving at that? Mike MU-2 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Soaring near Paris, France (Not Texas :-) | [email protected] | Soaring | 17 | November 13th 04 06:39 PM |
News from France | HECTOP | Piloting | 12 | April 1st 04 01:16 AM |
Russia joins France and Germany | captain! | Military Aviation | 12 | September 9th 03 09:56 AM |
France Bans the Term 'E-Mail' | bsh | Military Aviation | 38 | July 26th 03 03:18 PM |
"France downplays jet swap with Russia" | Mike | Military Aviation | 8 | July 21st 03 05:46 AM |